+0
I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I'd love to run it for you now.

This is what I heard from the Steve Jobs' speech.
Is I'd grammatically correct here?
Can I say I love to run?
Thanks in advance
1 2
Comments  
I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I'd love to run it for you now.
Is I'd grammatically correct here? Yes. Perfect. I'd love = I would love Why do you suspect it's wrong?
Can I say I love to run? Yes, as a separate sentence. No, not as a substitute in the sentence above.
CJ
Understand!
I have no suspicion now.
Thanks, CJ.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Doesn't it bother you that a present perfect tense in an if clause is used with would?
Isn't the past usually used with would in that case?
It is unusual. The reason it's OK is that would like to (or would love to) is an idiom equivalent to want to(a present tense). Emotion: smile
So it's like
I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I'd love to run it for you now. ~
I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I want to run it for you now.

CJ
Hi,

What is the difference?

I hope you've seen it, but if you hadn't (haven't), I'd love to run it for you now.

I think the 'hadn't' version is a type 2 conditional (unreal). To me, using a present tense in the if-clause is new. How does it work?

Is this good?
If you have money, I would love to borrow some from you.

Hi,

You used this sentence in your answering post:

I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I'd love to run it for you now. ~

I think we can have the ''would' in the main clause to indicate the future event like this.

I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I'd love to run it for you tomorrow

would this translate to this too?

I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I want to run it for you tomorrow.

I think the above two are a type 3 conditional.

Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
CalifJimDoesn't it bother you that a present perfect tense in an if clause is used with would?
Isn't the past usually used with would in that case?
It is unusual.
Thanks, CJ. I understand would love = want to.
You pointed what I'm stuck with.
I think the sentence is technically not a conditional, because Steve is going to run the ad here whether the audience has seen it or not. Actually he does, I've seen it on iTunes.
I remember that my grammar book says similar cases:
"I'm going to get a beer if you want some" and "I'll get a beer if you want some" are a bit different in meanig.
The former indicates the speaker is going to get a beer whether the listener wants some or not, while the latter indicates it's up to the listener that the speaker will get a beer.
Whew! What do you think?
AnonymousI think we can have the ''would' in the main clause to indicate the future event like this.

I hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I'd love to run it for you tomorrow
No. The "would" does not indicate futurity. It combines with "love" to form an idiom "would love (to)", which takes place in present time and is a weakened form of "want to". It is the word "tomorrow" which indicates futurity, and it modifies "run", not "love".
CJ
AnonymousI hope you've seen it, but if you haven't, I want to run it for you tomorrow.

I think the above two are a type 3 conditional.
No. Type 3 has "If ... had ..., ... would have ...".
... if you haven't, I want to run it for you tomorrow is a modified Type 1 -- modified because the if clause has a present perfect instead of the usual present.
CJ
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Show more